1
$\begingroup$

I'm not to well deep in socialism, so I don't know exact details on how it works. But I do know that it involves the redistribution of wealth, heavily taxing corporations and redistributing it to all citizens so that they have just enough to pay for food and expenses.

This seems like an interesting idea that I might like to implement in a cyberpunk city. But, this seems to be a system that pretty much eliminates the whole dystopic cyberpunk aspect of it. Nobody's really poor, corporations are fairly down from being so heavily taxed, not really much room there for any dystopia or cyberpunk. Any ideas around this, or just do away with altogether?

$\endgroup$
8
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Megacorporations, one of the most iconic elements of the Cyberpunk genre, are mutually incompatible with socialism. $\endgroup$
    – sphennings
    Jun 28, 2017 at 20:01
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ While this isn't as bad as some other examples I've seen, please look over How to deal with “I have a High Concept, please do my work for me” questions? on Worldbuilding Meta, then focus your question. "Any ideas?" isn't really answerable, but what you have in the question title just might be. $\endgroup$
    – user
    Jun 28, 2017 at 20:13
  • $\begingroup$ Your idea seems to be a closer match with "Tech Noir" subgenre than a typical Cyberpunk. $\endgroup$
    – Alexander
    Jun 28, 2017 at 20:16
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ In a real socialist country "corporations" would be state enterprises and the wealth would belong to the state (or to the people, if you prefer). In actual real socialist countries taxes were either small or non-existant, because there is no reason to tax when everything belongs to the state which allocates resources and distributes income according to its principles or interests. $\endgroup$
    – AlexP
    Jun 28, 2017 at 21:26
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Vincent That's because all of these countries spent the cold war opposing the USSR and socialism is frequently regarded as a synonim for communism, so they avoid the definition. However, all of their strategies of wealth distribution come from socialist ideology - and in fact they were implemented to prevent local communist parties to grow too popular in their countries. $\endgroup$
    – Rekesoft
    Jun 29, 2017 at 7:42

4 Answers 4

5
$\begingroup$

I am quite familiar with socialism; the most successfully socialist country is likely Norway (and no, it is not because of North Sea Oil, but high taxation).

The essential idea is NOT to give everyone "just enough to pay for food and expenses."

Instead, the idea is a very strong safety net so your life, your children's lives, your children's education, health, shelter and safety are not in danger if you are unemployed.

As it turns out (and Norway and other socialist countries prove without doubt) people want more than survival, and will work to get it even if survival is assured.

Norway provides free health care (not just health insurance, free care, period), at a very high standard of care (higher than most hospitals in the USA). Yet for-pay hospitals still exist in Norway, some are willing to pay for private rooms, private nurses, house call doctors, etc.

Norway provides free education for its citizens, as much as they want (e.g. multiple PhDs, no problem), at any accredited college in the world they can get into. If you can get into Harvard, they pay the bill, and some living expenses in the bargain.

Nobody is fleeing Norway because of the high taxes (top rates more than double the USA top rates); the Norwegian people are raised with it and acclimated. The richest people in Norway consider it part of their culture; they take care of each other, and giving everybody an equal start in life helps to ensure they are maximizing the potential of everybody in their country; they aren't wasting anybody by impairing them from the beginning.

That said, your "dystopia" can be the difficulty of getting ahead. Misery is relative. You can be healthy, fed, sheltered and as educated as you can get, and still can't find a job to get ahead of the pack. You try to become famous as an artist, an actor, a musician, an entertainer, an author, an acrobat, and fail. You feel your life is a waste, you are kept like a pet, and you want more out of life and can't find the way to get it.

School is frickin' hard and competitive, and even if you get a PhD in something, the professorial jobs are all filled, the only openings are when somebody dies and 500 PhDs apply for the spot.

If you can't get ahead legally, then illegally seems like a valid option. Unlike most cyberpunk, the society is not oppressive, they are taking care of your sorry ass, but the outcome is oppressive, because between computers and highly taxed robots and other high tech AI, there is no way to escape living in a (heated, cool, safe) 200 sf room for the rest of your life. Sure, you can do anything you want, but socialism doesn't cover entertainment (well, maybe basic cable). You aren't going to travel the world, or own a fast car, or gamble in Vegas. Unless you get into the underside of life.

The state will pay to train you, and then you can engage in some illegal side gigs to buy some of the illegal training, hacking and activities that could land you in prison: Benevolent socialists will still lock you up. There is still a war between the law and the criminals.

That's the story hook, no matter how much people are given, they will still want more. Even if their every basic need is taken care of, they will work for more. (Look at the USA: it is possible to live on about \$1000 a month, but nearly everybody works to earn 4 or 5 times that on average, because they don't want just the bare minimum life of \$1000 a month.)

In a high-tech future, most jobs done by most people today will be done by machines, for 5% of what it would cost to hire a person. Suppose 90% of people are provided socialist subsistence so food, shelter (warmed and cooled, but small), education, health care and safety are well covered. Not entertainment, not travel. You have to earn money if you want those. If you want to play chess or gin rummy in the park for the rest of your life, you are all set.

If you want anything more, chances are you can't get a job no matter how hard you try, those go to the top 5% of the population in acuity and natural born skill, and 95% of us just aren't in that 5%. Once you learn you aren't: learn to play chess or get your cyberpunk on.

Added Clarification on Socialism

The OP thought money was distributed to the citizenry; that is seldom the case in actual Socialism, or money-distribution is a relatively smaller component of it. Socialism can simply provide services to the population, for free. So it doesn't give you money to buy healthcare, it provides health care. It doesn't give you money to rent a livable apartment, it provides you an apartment. It doesn't even have to give you money for food; but can provide you with the food. It doesn't have to give you money for transportation, it can provide public transportation (not just by bus, but in some cases taxis to transport one person to some justifiable destination; e.g. a person to a doctor's appointment). And finally, they do not have provide money for tuition and housing in college; they can just provide the college and dormitory rooms for free, funded by general taxation.

In the USA and Europe, we do not give people money to pay for privately owned toll roads; for the most part we just provide the roads for free, for individual, business, and public use.

Another aspect of socialism is that, besides the free services, people generally do work for money to buy better than the free services (if they want something other than the public cafeteria menu, for example, or a bigger apartment or a house). According to the IBC (International Building Code) an "apartment" can be as small as 220 sf, and that might be all that public shelter offers, per individual. (Which would have its own ramifications: Women might have children in order to be entitled to more space; people might get married or cohabit for the same reason.)

I say this to improve this answer: The cyberpunk aspect comes into play because, in world where a very large % of people have been put out of work by advanced tech, those people do not necessarily have a single dollar of income, and they aren't geniuses or exceptional athletes, artists, musicians, comics, gamers or beautiful enough to be models or actors. But working together, as criminals, they might be able to steal actual money from the working people.

$\endgroup$
4
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Awesome answer! I would love to read a book or series set in this kind of dystopia. But I'm not sure I'm talented enough to write one. It will take careful balance to show your protagonists discontent while they are living a life which is extremely luxurious when compared to those of the "have-nots" of the rest of the world. It would be all too easy to have the character come off as spoiled and thus loose the reader's affinity and admiration. Still, it is a Great dystopian world! Thanks for sharing it. $\endgroup$ Jun 28, 2017 at 22:09
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ They won't come across as spoiled if they really have tried everything, for say 10 years, and didn't make the cut. They finished their PhDs in high tech. They sacrificed, time and again, and failed, time and again. Even the criminals want the best, the underworld is not the easy way out. The tech and AI have advanced to the point there are no frikkin' jobs. Our hero start small, some prostitute needs some tech fixed (sex still sells), can't afford the "real" criminals, and overhears our desperate hero at a coffee shop... an hour job paid in cash. Then another, and her friends... $\endgroup$
    – Amadeus
    Jun 29, 2017 at 0:48
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Sounds good. Believable and yet still sympathetic. $\endgroup$ Jun 29, 2017 at 1:41
  • $\begingroup$ @HenryTaylor this is a bit late of a comment, but in the books on which the Expanse tv series is based, the Earth currently has a very similar situation; over half the population unemployed and on "basic". It is not the focus of the main plot, mainly just a feature of the setting; but some side stories go into it a bit. $\endgroup$
    – Uueerdo
    Nov 16, 2017 at 17:29
2
$\begingroup$

Easy: make the corporations be the ones redistributing wealth. Or the governments be the ones doing shady dystopian megacorp-style shenanigans. Or both. Sufficiently complex bureaucracy transcends corporate/governmental distinctions.

Think of the "freemium" business model, which is currently applied in a variety of games, becoming viable - or appearing to become viable - in real life. That'll be the justification for the socialism in your setting, at least: the masses are there to provide a social background for the "whales".

As for the "dystopia" part, well, not everyone fits the rules. Depending on how benevolent/competent the people who make the rules are (bureaucracy does not instantly instill either competence or benevolence), you can get as many disaffected misfits as your story requires.

For instance, Your Protagonist might have additional needs which aren't covered by the Insufficently Benevolent Megacorporation's Pre-emptive Pension Plan - say, a(n uncovered) medical condition, or an illegal (and therefore un-Pension'ed) love interest. Attempting to satisfy those needs through IBM's* normal channels just isn't working, so YP looks for someone else - and oops, IBM has a thing about loyalty.

*Despite the acronym, I do not actually have a grudge against the real-world IBM. Keeping it for now on account of hilarity.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

Consider the path that must be taken from a society which fosters young megacorps to a socialist "utopia". Revolution is an understatement as no fostering world power (which is what the megacorps are destine to be) would peacefully allow itself to be taxed into servitude. Going to war against another country is bloody. Going to war against the pillars of your own economy is suicidal. Any government which attempted to transition to socialism would quickly find itself abandoned by the very companies which it had hoped to tax. Corporate assets and expertise would flee the country like rats off of a sinking ship. Leaving a starving government trying to tend to a starving population after all the producers and makers have departed.

Is that enough dystopia for you?

No? Okay, take it to round two. The migrant megaCorps are now foreign powers with the technology and resources to restore the fallen nation. All they want it total freedom to run things their way. Get rid of all those pesky human rights laws and we will come back and feed your people. While you are at it, give us a seat on your governmental councils... no, not just a seat... the big one at the head of the table.

And just to keep the population happy, Mr. President, you can still claim to be a beneficial socialist state. We will provide for our employees and assist you in getting rid of those who do not sign up to work for us. Everyone pitches in so that everyone gets to eat. Don't worry about those who don't pitch in... we will take care of them. We have tons of surveillance equipment and police technologies to keep things running smoothly.

Is that enough cyberpunk for you?

The mega corps are coming. Socialism is just one of the shorter, more efficient paths which they might take to get here.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

Focusing more on the Cyberpunk and less on the socialism, the answer is control. You need network connectivity as an integral part of the society. Perhaps everyone has a municipal "wallet" app that gives their id number the monthy handout, and it is connected to their chip in their brain/wrist/handheld device. The chip and connected app not only have the socialist stipend but also prove citizenship and etc. Scan points are everywhere, not just at point-of-sale stations and mass transit. If you dont have your cyber implant/device/id, you have to find other forms of payment for things and cant use the mass transit.

$\endgroup$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .